Age of baby/child, that is, not age of mother! I was inspired to write this post after my family and I were featured in New! magazine thanks to my experiences of breastfeeding beyond the age of two. It’s not online, as I’m not a celebrity, and neither are the other two lovely mums who were featured, so here’s a scanned pic of my little bit:
The first thing I wanted to clarify is that I did not say ‘…if I wanted a glass of wine, I’d express beforehand and then wait 24 hours before feeding, so no alcohol entered the milk’, because a) I don’t drink wine and b) you don’t need to worry about the alcohol from one glass of wine causing any problems! What I actually said was: ‘No, I didn’t miss out on any evenings out – it’s find to drink a little alcohol when you’re breastfeeding, as long as you don’t have lots of all-night benders…and even then, if you express a little beforehand and then wait for 24 hours before feeding, it’s fine.’ <sigh>
Still, I guess I need to be grateful that that’s the only misquote in the piece – I’ve heard of far larger disasters when it comes to talking to the press about breastfeeding! Oh, and the fact they can’t spell Sven! :D
But this post relates to what their ‘expert’ had to say on the matter:
I know that the magazine wanted an opposing view – they always do – so I guess that’s why they asked a ‘children’s nutrition expert’ rather than a breastfeeding counsellor, or child psychologist, or someone who really understand the issue. As usual, this ‘expert’ – a Dr Pauline Emmett – has been asked to pass opinion on something that is really outside of her remit, because most real experts will tell you the exact opposite, including the World Health Organisation.
Anyway, it prompted me to dissect the reasons she gives that we should all wean our babies from the breast before the age of two as they just seem to get more and more bonkers as other ‘experts’ reasons for stopping get widely discounted.
1. There are no health benefits to breastfeeding a child when they are eating a good range of solid foods…I would also worry that a child who is breastfed may eat less of a range of foods and not get all the relevant nutrients and vitamins they need.
Ok, where do I start? I guess with the fact that I’d love to see her evidence for this. I can’t possibly see how breastmilk suddenly stops being nutritional after the age of two years. It’s like saying that there’s no health benefits to eating apples or spinach or any other number of healthful foods, so long as you’re eating lots of other good stuff: kind of true but largely irrelevant.
Secondly, if, like lots of children, your child does not want to eat a good range of solid foods, then how handy to have breastmilk to mop up any deficiencies that might be happening. Being a fussy child has nothing to do with whether you’re breastfed or not, but what do you do if your child refuses a good range of solid foods and you’re not breastfeeding? Pump them full of vitamins? Sneak vegetables into their diet in clever ways? Force them? Breastfeeding’s easier…and a lot nicer ;)
2. …a child’s immune system is fully formed and they don’t need any help from their mother’s breastmilk.
Again, would love to see some research on this. All the research I’ve seen so far says that it’s at least 6-8 years of age when a child’s immune system is fully developed, and one place I read said 14 years! A far cry from the age of two, as quoted by Ms Emmett.
And the same argument applies as above – so what??? As adults our immune systems are fully developed, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t help it along a little by making sure we have plenty of vitamin C etc. in our diets.
3. …this sort of parenting means that the child is more dependent on their mother, which is unfair on them should something happen to her.
This one just made me laugh out loud! What a ridiculous argument! The idea that a child who wasn’t being breastfed would be any less distraught at the loss of his or her mother than one who was being breastfed is utterly preposterous! Does she think we should all stop cuddling our children beyond the age of two in case they feel so close to us that they can’t cope if something happens to us?
I think it’s a shame that magazines have this desperate need to always provide an alternative argument to something and just put across the idea that actually there’s nothing wrong at all with breastfeeding beyond the age of two, or whatever. If I were ever asked to be the expert with the opposing view, I would say this:
“Mothers should definitely wean their babies before the age of two if they or their baby wants to. If they want to continue, however, then there’s no reason why not.”
I imagine that that wouldn’t be inflammatory enough for a magazine, though.
Oh, and just for the fun of it, here’s my favourite pic ever that I didn’t even know we had until I had to find one of me breastfeeding a toddler!



















